Chromium is open source and free (both as in beer and speech). The license says they've made no future commitments and made no warrants.
Google signed up to give something away for free to people who want to use it. From the very first version, it wasn't perfectly compatible with other web browsers (which mostly did IE quirks things). If you don't want to use it, because it doesn't maintain enough backwards compatibility... Then don't.
The license would be relevant if I'd claimed that removing XSLT was illegal or opened them up to lawsuits, but I didn't. The obligation they took on is social/ethical, not legal. By your logic, chrome could choose to stop supporting literally anything (including HTML) in their "browser" and not have done anything that we can object to.
iIRC, lack of IE compatibility is fundamentally different, because the IE specific stuff they didn't implement was never part of the open web standards, but rather stuff Microsoft unilaterally chose to add.
> By your logic, chrome could choose to stop supporting literally anything (including HTML) in their "browser" and not have done anything that we can object to.
Literally this. Microsoft used to ship a free web browser. Then they stopped. That's not something anybody can object to.
> because the IE specific stuff they didn't implement was never part of the open web standards, but rather stuff Microsoft unilaterally chose to add.
Standards aren't holy books. It's actually more important to support real customer use cases than to follow standards.
But you know this. If standards are more important that real use cases, then the fact that XSLT has been removed from the html5 standard is enough justification to remove it from Chrome.
> Literally this. Microsoft used to ship a free web browser. Then they stopped. That's not something anybody can object to.
There is a fundamental difference between ceasing to make a browser and continuing to make a browser, while not meeting your expectations as a browser maker.
> If standards are more important that real use cases, then the fact that XSLT has been removed from the html5 standard is enough justification to remove it from Chrome.
Browsers very much have not depreciated support for non-HTML5 markup (e.g. the HTML4 era <center> tag still works). This is because upholding devs and users expectation that standards compliant websites that once worked will continue to work is important.
The license is the way it is not by choice. We should be clear about that and acknowledge KHTML, and both Safari and Chromium origins. Some parts remain LGPL to this day.
Fwiw, this is a facile argument. You make no attenpt to demonstrate that after major reorganization (breakup / nationalization) that the firm will continue to have the desirable attributes (innovation, efficincy, ability to build) that made them too important to fail.
It's the long now foundation thing. The long now foundation encourages writing years with five digits to encourage readers to think about long term planning, to plan for a future of humanity that is measured in more than thousands of years.
$dayjob sent an email to everyone with postman installed and asked us to uninstall when postman switched to online. $dayjob IT still maintains a wiki page and includes it on the banned software list. Used to be ubiquitous over there.
I think the West Wing clip highlights how out of date the thinking in the article is. When this clip was filmed, turn by turn navigation didn't exist yet. If the average person saw a map, it had north at the top. By contrast, these days, if I see a map, the direction I'm currently going is normally up. I don't find it freaky for maps to be oriented with north down because I see a map like that every time I drive south in my car.
D is fine. Like many languages that postdate C++ and Java, it made better choices, learning from the past. But it doesn't really have a differentiator.
Well, the standard says you can, but it doesn't actually work in practice in msvc, which is the only compiler that's supported modules for over a year.
